I think you misunderstood my intent.

While it's absolutely wonderful that this information is readily available, I was being hypothetical, not "foot stamping." I was saying such information as you have been provided should be offered by any agent, government or non, such as the industry regulatory agency mentioned in the original article as evidence of its policy changes. When I say "I want" I am being proverbial. I am speaking as the public demanding that policy decisions be backed up. I am not talking to you or anyone else individually, nor am I talking as myself. I was being dramatic for emphasis.

I am well aware of the above statistics. I am, after all, a gender rights activist. This does not absolve agents from providing this information when making policy decisions. In addition, such information highlights the way we fail boys, then fail young men. If you chase these statistics to their origin, you will see that there are issues begining in early childhood that are far more relevant than eroge games featuring rape. However, this is not my point. Again, my sole point was to avoid "witchhunts." Which is a very real fear when the agencies do not explain reasoning, or worse, the public does not demand it.

One more quick note here: pedophilia != pedorasty. Your statistics are quite right for sex offenders, but say nothing of internal proclivities.

I HATE THIS KEYBOARD!

But that is irrelevant.

For example, how many blacks/Jews frequent concerts of bands like Screwdriver, or other Nazi functions? I'm guessing zero, literally.

The main driving force behind banning these things is to do with the discrimination of women (or one of the main forces). But this isn't exclusive to just men, as Nazi gatherings are to whites. It may have more appeal to men, but so dfoes car racing, boxing, and there are female things, too. The point is, females are welcome to part take. Probably overly welcomed, actually.

If you are considering something else to be a valid reason why it should be banned aside lowering women, then please say it. But if this isn't the case, and no one is getting hurt, there should not be a problem with it.

Banning something that has absolutley no negative impact on anyone whatsoever just because you don't like it isn't really supporting any concept of freedom.

This is entirly theoratical, however.

I havn't seen any evidence that this causes rape or anything else negative. Of course, the possibility exists that it does; this is why the police use psychologists to find out every detail about a criminal in cases such as rape, serial killing, pedophilia. You can find the results of what they find, things like "a pedophiles favorite sport to watch is womens gymnastics" LOL.

I'm sure if they were finding rapist facts such as "most rapists collect rape media" then there would be grounds for a serious inquiry. But I don't think this is so.

Even so, if several rapists did claim they liked these things, you'd have to seriously consider if it was just a psychological problem or not, or if these things litterlly are the cause of this.

I mean, you can't ban Doom just coz a couple of kids decided to shoot up their school. It just isn't logical. You'd need proof that Doom effected a seriously large portion of people who played it in this way.

For example, it is easy to ban weed, coz the vast majority of long term smokers suffer serious mental problems after a dozen years or so.

I think you need find another reason.

I'm surprised this is only a recent thing. To show rape in a way that means its acceptable for anyone is a disgusting form of media, and it isn't needed in modern society.

I don't believe taking such things away from people will cause them to actually rape someone.

The ban is a step in the right direction to show that people don't tolerate rape or simulated rape. No, no-one is hurt, but the very idea is pretty digusting to the majority of people.

There is freedom is this world, but there are things that are clearly wrong. Rape, for example, should never be endorsed in any way.

I do have conflicts in my own mind about it though. Murder games are on the shelves left right and center, so I'm not sure how to feel about that since it's obviously wrong too. I suppose my concern with this is that 99% of the time it tends to degrade one demographic (females) which is possibly more damaging.

This thred is becoming rather silly!

I think the point in question.

Rape clubs anywhere, in this case Japan send the wrong message and it would appear that the activities went overboard within the forementioned Japanese club.

Rape computer games are just wrong as they can be accessed by minors and they should be banned. Younger people without kids obviously are not agreeing with that here with a few "exceptions".

Public rape of an unbeknown citizen is I'm sure illegal in Japan and should not be tolerated by either sex as it is a violation of one's personal body.

Rape by mutual agreement is obviously a private matter and if the parties agree, then the sky is the limit and none of anybodies business if all are above the legal age and all consenting.

But unless you can come up with a decent reason as to why, other than you dislike it, you should not be allowed to make any proggress.

Have something "disgusting" is a lot better than having someone tell you what you can and cannot do just because it is their own personal preference, even if you never wanted to do that in the first place.

That is not the topic at hand. It is unrelated.

Names, please.

If you think all my philosophical back and forth seems to never reach a conclusion, I think my main concern can be summed up in a very famous poem by Martin Niemöller:

In many, many ways I am a liberal. In many, many ways, I am a conservative, but my views are very consistent when thought of in this way. Much like Ben Franklin in the quote a posted earlier, I worry about where it will end once we start accepting limitations on the freedom of the majority, when it is but one minority preying on another minority, when there are clearly other issues causing the former minority to use said freedom in a way detrimental to the latter minority.

I guess what I am saying is, keep your morality out of my legality.

No time to scroll through posts..

Internet shopping time:)

The reason is that simulated rape would generally give an incorrect message about rape, especially if a younger audience is subjected to it (with the rise of the availability of such media and the internet, this is entirely possible.) It's better if such media doesn't exist. It's more than just the fact that I dislike it. I don't like pornography, but the parties (generally) consent to such practices and whether or not it is a violation of man or woman is questionable. Though I still worry about it's availability to children. (I know children aren't innocent little people who haven't got a clue, but they are more easily influenced.)

Don't get me wrong, people can make their own decisions about the world. But this is just too far. Rape is a horrible thing and shouldn't ever be represented as pleasurable and positive. It gives vunerable people the wrong idea about it.